Guest Post: The State As A Fantasy

If there were a prize for the best “do as I say, not as I do” politician, the latest winner would be California Senator Dianne Feinstein. Senator Feinstein, who is currently leading a crusade to plug the White House’s recent spring of classified military leaks, is the Chairwoman of the powerful Select Committee on Intelligence. Because of her position of power, she has become “deeply disturbed by the continuing leaks of classified information to the media.” In other words, Ms. Feinstein finds it appalling that the American public is finding out about the not-so-glamorous doings of its own government. Her scorn for disinfecting sunlight has inspired her to call for the prosecution of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange for espionage.

This talk of super secretive government would be all fine and good for a minion of the security state except for one thing: Senator Feinstein is one of the biggest leakers in Congress herself. And it just so happens that her husband has benefited financially from contracting with the U.S. military. For all her talk of protecting the American people, Feinstein is just another well-connected thief in the societal racket known as the state. As Salon’s Glenn Greenwald trenchantly observes:

That the powerful Senator who has devoted herself to criminally punishing low-level leakers and increasing the wall of secrecy is herself “one of the biggest leakers in Congress” is about as perfect an expression as it gets of how the rule of law and secrecy powers are sleazily exploited in Washington

In the scum filled world of politics, unscrupulous behavior is a permanent fixture. It’s why the rule makers go out of their way to convince the voting public that its best interests are being taken to heart. The vision of a righteous government is sold to the people not just on Election Day but everyday thereafter. As long as voters stay complacent in the fantasy that their elected representatives are fighting the good fight, outspoken critics of the state will remain a minority. No amount of shoddy logic, guilt tripping, or blatant lies will awake the masses before it’s too late and all previous memories of freedom have been violently stripped away.

The truth is suppressed by the fantasy being continually force fed to the public, not just by politicians and their teleprompters, but by the a vast portion of the media which acts more like a squawk box for the state itself rather than an independent observer. The New York Times, the supposed great standard-bearer of journalistic quality, recently admitted that its stenographers and reporters allow their writings to be contorted by the same public officials who they claim to cover objectively. These reporters, so desperate to get a few words with any government official, are willing to give full discretion on what is reported right back to the people whose interest lies in manipulating the information the public receives. As the Times article reveals:

From Capitol Hill to the Treasury Department, interviews granted only with quote approval have become the default position.

The unconscionable behavior of the political class should be thought of as a contagious disease that infiltrates any industry that comes within influence of the state. Government contractors, lobbying associations, favored corporations, and even the press all seek to use the monopolized power of government to further their own interests. Instead of attempting to roll back stifling regulations, many of these firms simply wish to get in on the spoils of the great extortionary scheme. The results are always the same. Politicians pretend to be saving the people from cold-natured capitalism while politically-connected businessmen and bankers act as if their commercial success is completely of their own doing. The hidden truth is both act in tandem to fleece the average taxpayer.

The fantasy then continues unabated. As F.A. Hayek recognized in The Road to Serfdom, central planners and their intellectual patrons achieve their power by gathering the

“support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently.”

No matter how many times government policy fails to deliver on its promises, the reasoning stays the same: Politicians just need more tax dollars to spend goods into existence, central bankers need to print more money, human rights must be stripped away to ensure safety, consumers need to spend more and save less, and government will always know best.

Today as most major economies are taking a turn for the worse, news outlets are filled with the pleas of esteemed intellectuals for further monetary stimulus and spending. Even those economists generally considered in favor of markets are looking to central banks, which are given a totally non-free market government grant of privilege, to induce a boom in lending and demand through printing money. As Pater Tenebrarum pointed out, it appears that Federal Reserve is close to announcing another round of monetary expansion. The Telegraph’s veteran economics commentator Ambrose Evans-Pritchard even went as far as to pen an editorial titled “Weimar solution beckons as manufacturing crashes in US Fifth District?” No one seemed to ask the more important question of “since when does destroying a nation’s currency and setting the foundation for the rise of a murderous regime actually help out manufacturing when all is said and done? “

Even the man on the street, unlike Evans-Pritchard and his money-crankish peers in academia and print media, realizes that adding to the stock of currency does not add to society’s overall stock of wealth. More paper dollars, euros, yen, etc. isn’t the same as more foodstuffs, personal computers, and cellular phones. When Zimbabwe’s stock market was skyrocketing to heavenly heights in 2007, the inflation lovin’ crowd must have looked on with delight at the uninhibited fruition of their favored policy. Grandmothers carrying wheelbarrows full of cash to the supermarket to purchase a few loafs of bread meant nothing in the face of accelerating GDP figures.

But again, the fantasy at play here is the idea that the state can create something out of nothing with the magic of the printing press. But as history proves time and time again, unbacked credit expansion always sews the seeds of its own destruction as the boom must inevitably turn to bust. The real beneficiaries of newly created fiat money isn’t society in general but, as Murray Rothbard notes, “the State, State-manipulated banks and their favorites” who are first in line to receive the currency first.Proponents of central banking must spend a good deal of time concocting nonsensical explanations to ensure the overall public realize how ripped off it really is.

At no place in time were governments ever formed with good intentions in mind. This is the unvarnished truth as opposed to the fantasy world that is indoctrinated first within public school classrooms and is repeated in various outlets until old age. The state being a burden on society is a universal principle that transcends through all governmental levels and sizes. It was recently reported that a thirteen year old had his hot dog cart shut down by city officials in the city of Holland, Michigan. Because of zoning restrictions aimed at protecting already established restaurants, the boy, Nathan Duszynski, saw his small enterprise succumb to the crookedness of local government officials.

Now just think about this for a minute. A thirteen year old was savvy enough and had the foresight to purchase a significant amount of capital to start a modest business. When most kids his age are sitting in front of the television, Duszynski was gaining real world business experience. His customers didn’t say no to his effort; the government did. The public is typically told that zoning laws are for their own safety when quite the opposite is true. Zoning laws, like practically any decree that stems from closed-door dealings of politicians, are to the benefit of some individuals at the expense of others.

Mr. Duszynski, by virtue of his entrepreneurship, has already accomplished more productive-wise than any lifelong bureaucrat or politician. It is this writer’s hope that the shutting down of his small business will serve as a lesson for him in that he won’t buy into the fantasy that the state exists to provide peace and liberty.

Welcome to the pyramid of EVIL, a mountain of wealth, crime, theft and corruption built on the foundation of good honest hard working citizens, where your captors will bite, claw, kick, stomp, even elbow you in the face to keep you inprisoned in poverty and slavery and licking their buts

The problem is the general public giving their power away to a central bank to begin with like in 1913. We must realize it's the peoples power the politicians are giving away to private concerns, when it's not in our elected representatives power to take our power away through their actions.

The people should have a class action law suit to close the Federal Reserve and restore the peoples power to coin money at the congressional level.

People need to understand that if the central bank can print all the money they want then they can afford to buy all the politicians they want. There will never be democracy as long as we have a central bank.

This does not mean the central bank gets involved directly in politics, that would be beyond stupid. It can do it indirectly under the cover of the FOMC directing buys at their favorite clients.

Anyone notice that with the exception of Ron Paul when there is a politician that understand s the Fed and votes for smaller government they get booted out of office?

Its bull shit and it will not stop until all 8,400 tons of gold are confiscated and sold to the public.

under the Hire Act you will be required to post an amount equal to 30% of any funds you attempt to transfer overseas until IRS is satisfied taxes have been paid on those funds. your SS # will be most helpful to this process comrade!

Corruption is corruption regardless of the window dressing - what rights do you have anyway? Rights that forefathers fought for whom yanked rights from native Americans who thought they had rights because they were born somewhere. If you want change, eventually you'll have to organize people and if you able then you have to find out if you wont become corrupt with power at hand

You must possess an intellect of dizzying proportion, to have distilled all possible permutations of human existence, down to a bipolar world of governance, consisting of either the USSA experiment, or Somalia. JHFC you must have it all fucking figured out

The State appreciates your attempts to convince others that they are better off with that boot on thier neck, so they'd better just get use to it.

Anarchy is devoid of RULERS, not rules. Somalia is not anarchy. Somalia is a direct result of our foreign fucking policy. It is the direct result of YOUR fucking consent to instututionalized theft.

...Anarchy is devoid of RULERS, not rules... (just forget Somalia and empires for a minute).

rule 1 and no others in an anarchial society where we all live as masters of our destiny on our trees or in our caves : survival of the fittest until he is no more. WHich is sooner than he thought. As he is not immortal nor his progeny.

Why did man leave the trees and the grottos? To invent other rules, as he needed community. And in community it got more complex, beyond rule #1.

Rule #2 became: golden rule. Do unto others...

Now, the trouble starts. Nobody has same interpretation of it. We needed a referee...

It can't be GOd he is never there and anyways my God is not yours!

So whose the referee to decide in unbiased way between Joe and Jack?

The founding fathers called it government; elected by we the people.

But now you want to junk it all...we are back to having to go back to the trees, 'cos if we live in community we will need a referee. So anarchy is fine if we live in trees not in community.

Rinse and repeat...this is getting tiresome.

Some people have ears but nothing between them...empty space no grey matter.

They should have stayed in the trees. While we go from rule #2 to rule #2000.

Its called civilization and it applies even to a golf course where you push a ball into a hole.

Funny that we need rules and referees even for such silly things. Thats because a golf course is communal living. Now if we all had our own golf courses...we'd be oligarchs not people.

So anarchy only works for gods and oligarchs, not for people in community, as they being mortals and having no serfs to work for them, coalesce under fear, being scared to die on their own. That's part of rule number 1 getting stymied...by mortality.

But to understand that you have to play golf. Now that sucks. Why did I leave my tree? and start to think and to feel fear?

Yes, we require rules for a community to thrive and a referee to implement a majority agreed set of rules or even better a 2/3 rds majority or more which is not so hard if we can use the grey cells you refer to as basic law is not so complicated and neither is interpretation. How do we handle differing interpretation? Simple..do unto others as you would like done to you. If things are spelt out humans still understand it though it looks as if it is not going to stay that way for long with the long term poisoning of kids through "education" so we have a state enforcing rules they dream up or rather their masters the central banks dictate rather than referees implementing a majority agreed set of rules. Worse, we don't even have a say in choosing the referee perhaps because there is a sizable minority of people who think like you do who are enough to swing the required votes that the kleptocrats want

No doubt you've been educated by the state as you think entirely with-in the box. Thats the same shit discourse I used to hear in the 1960s when the tenured collectivist poly-si/econ profs used to rant against Rand and how we need rules instead of free markets.

though on the opposite side of the argument about "anarchism" from Falak, he, as opposed to yu, has demonstrated a willingness(and more importantly - an ability) to think independently of the herd here...

it is yu, sir, who are entirely within the box...and yur reference to Rand betrays the presence of he whose misunderstanding of the difference between the authentic opponents of statism and the phony prophets of the pharisees' neo-trot program is the perfect illustration of how goydom got into the mess it finds itself in today...

but at least yu have had the courage to state yur piece...the feeble fingered folk whose only facility is playing with their [vote]buttons are always driven to distraction by the presence of those who have grown out of the need for approval before setting their own course in the choppy waters of the fight club...their humorless existence milling about in the shadows of mediocrity is a lesson as to the perils of too much stroking of the keyboard and too little exercise of the synapses!

This is big leap you make. Your criticism of Rand is fair. She seemed unable to make the leap from the State and its monoply on coercion, run by society's criminals, to a more morally justified system which mitigates coercion and violence through voluntary interaction, with unlimited risk/liability to the downside.

It is every bit fair as fair as G Speed's appraisal of leftists, who fail badly at their attempts to eviscerate Rand, in the usual fits of ignorace (of Rand), and cacauphony of logical fallacy. While you seem prepared to toss the baby/bathwater, Rand's philosophy remains intact. Her portrayal of the machinations through which the unproductive Oligarchy gain control of society, and means of resistance thereof are, with few exceptions, THE roadmap.

In short it is entirely possible to exalt Rand's IDEAS, yet still oppose The State, and be logically consistent. No taking welfare is not logically inconsistent. You have every right to reclaim your property from the thief that stole it.

indeed squire...we all have a right to our opinions, and to express them free of the dross of half-baked assertions that concentrate upon the putative lacks of the presenter to the exclusion of examination of the idea presented...,were Falaks' [probably mistaken]musings upon anarchism to be critiqued for their content, in other words, there would be not any great issue taken with g-speeds spiel...

however, that spiel seems emblematic of the [definitely]mistaken notion that all criticism of "objectivism" comes from the 'left.'

A far more serious and damaging demolition of the kloset-trots konjob comes from the authentic anarchist continuum that takes issue with both wings(objectivism&libertarianism)of the moneypowers' misdirection of potential resistors into the kamp of the enemy. Mr G would be well advised to get his knowledge base up to speed in that direction, before dissing authors's of considerable more heft and substance than he has heretofore assembled. Then perhaps he could effectively deconstruct the ideas of his opponent, rather than merely indulge in spurious assertions of no significance to the central topic.

*while having no association with the ideas presented there, or presenters, I find Dick Eastman a fascinating contrarian voice in the fine tradition of an Eustance Mullins, and enoy seeing elements of truth presented from whichever direction they come.

rule 1...survival of the fittest until he is no more. WHich is sooner than he thought. As he is not immortal nor his progeny.

Might makes right. Humans engage in free exchange using logic and reason so we don't have to resort to force to achieve our ends. Community does not give one the right to coerce others. Again...this is why we engage in free trade.

Rule #2 became: golden rule. Do unto others...Nobody has same interpretation of it.

The only relevant moral interpretation is to not initiate force. PERIOD.

But now you want to junk it all...we are back to having to go back to the trees, 'cos if we live in community we will need a referee. So anarchy is fine if we live in trees not in community.

You are the only one talking about junking it all and living in trees. How exactly would "junking it all" result in returning to trees and caves? This is a false choice, and you have no proof to back up this assertion. I however have centuries of evidence of government impeding human progress. I have 100 years of government killing over 200 million of its own citizens. I am merely pointing out the paradox arises from failing to check your premise with regard to initiation of force, which is the only method available to government. Is only a monopoly on force is capable of resolving differnces among two people engaging a voluntary association? If people are so biased and corruptible?, why allow a monoply on force consisting of a small group of people

Some people have ears but nothing between them...empty space no grey matter.

Argumentum ad hominem. Your admission of your own inability to face the the evidence, and therefore, defeat, is accepted unconditionally. Thanks for playing.

RE: Golf and referees

Last time I played golf, there wee no government appointed referees, and golf was a game played voluntarily.

I've played golf in municipal courses all over the world, as in private ones. THe "government" of these courses is private but it is there nevertheless, effective every day, and you don't do what you fancy. You respect the rules of the game which are numerous. Don't hide in the dust of semantics or you'll be chasing shadows not substance.

To compare a golf course to our current legal situation is a straw man argument at best.

Rules, to a point, make sense, but they are not an unalloyed good, even with (sometimes, especially with) vigorous enforcement. Put it this way - every Jew, Gypsy, Slav, trade union member, homosexual, and so on that died in Hitler's camps died according to the laws (rules) of the time. Same for the people who died in the camps in Russia, China, Cambodia, and so on.

And how safe are we from this? "If you see something, say something."

"I see... He's a smoker and I don't like smokers. He's a terrorist."

I see... He's making time with that really hot chick I want to hit on. He's a terrorist"

I see... I don't like my spouse. They are OBVIOUSLY a terrorist."

And so on.

The worst of it is, it actually makes interpersonal violence easier. You don't need a firearm, a knife, a bat. Just a phone call, and it's all handled no fuss, no muss. No need to face them in any way, and your tax dollars will take care of them.

We have so many laws that "ignorance of the law is no excuse" has a very hollow ring to it. I wonder if a lawyer could even list all the regulations that have the force of law governing his office - and this is a person whose whole professional effort is devoted to the law.

I'm no Christian, but even I have noticed this civilization has surpassed itself in empowering the seven deadly sins. While slightly OT, think about it:

Much of this site is devoted to exposing the greed of the rulers.

Pride - "We're better than you, so the laws don't count" Corzine

Malice - See above.

Sloth - One more reference to "Dancing with the Stars"

Envy - If they didn't think it would sell, Obama's team would never have some up with that line "You didn't build that."

Lust - got a Russian bride yet? How about those penis/breast enlargement ads?

Gluttony - The fact "they" are all up in arms over obesity kinda says it here.

The overall point is, we have gotten to the point rules do not guarantee safety or public order.

That's my whole point, just like on the golf course you have laws and a constitution in the USA. Its all there and its a precious heritage. If it doesn't work its because the PEOPLE have lost it! They allow the corrupt to rule in THEIR name!

All it takes is for 300 million US citizens to require that democracy works again and rule of law prevails. Its forty years or more of public apathy culture that has allowed big business and crony capitalism to run the show. Only way out : the people have is to get INVOLVED once again on the side of requiring public probity. As this has not occurred for a long time, its going to be a LONG painful experience to relearn becoming aware politically and then acting accordingly, taking responsibility and becoming active citizens of a renovated country. Nobody does it for you, freedom has to be won through collective will and respect of one's OWN rights.

This whole theoretical debate on this thread is a symptom of DENIAL by the people on ZH to assume their collective responsibility as citizens, escapism by putting all the blame on STATE!

falak, you mean the under 100 IQ crowd? the problem with democracy is one long recognized..give idiots the vote (we do) and see what you get..hint we got it now. the mob is called a mob for a reason or do you not agree.

just limiting the vote to men would have prevented the nanny state get it the "nanny" state of well meaning over protective gov we got today. hard facts but true none the less.

thats a debate on which Churchill said his seminal words : democracy is the worst of systems barring all others. If you prefer philosopher king, the rule of the elite, you can get Napoleon or a watered down version; like Charles de Gaulle, or in the USA, like Lincoln or FDR. These guys were all eminent statists who thought they new best. Montesquieu and de Tocqueville got it right on both sides of THAT debate : have state, keep it democratic on some fundamental issues, keep it elitist and republican on others; but for God's sake keep it in separation of powers mode. As crony oligopoly power is the WORST of all worlds...and we are there! These guys have made Marx pertinent again and that is an awesome epitaph to have history bequeath on their version of financialised oligarchy capitalism.

The libertarian point on this thread is : getting rid of the state altogether and we'll be OK, is just hopium and dopium. Its not even the verdict of history IMO.

Well, after more than a decade into the 21st century, democracy has shown itself to be the current WORST form of government.

Churchill's words belie the fact that all governments operate the same way and all governments are evil. Government picks winners and creates losers, it destroys people's lives and livelihoods for the benefit of the few. It always has, it always will.

"The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God." Thomas Jefferson

I know thats human nature. But you can't change it, you have to live it by regulating it through laws and to impose laws you need referees called government. We don't live in never-never land anarchial utopia.

Building Ideology "cul de sacs" is also man's recurrent disease. Lets stay pragmatic and live with our warts. And do housecleaning when the government elite gets corrupt.

The missing link to this whole thread in the current crisis of civilization is that THE PEOPLE OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION ON EARTH HAVE FORGOTTEN THEIR CIVIC SENSE, in material pursuit of selfish aggrandisement.

That's where we are today. Its the collective will to impose basic simple ground rules that is missing is western civilization. If the people in power in two party complacency and crony capitalism have expropriated power beyond limits to themselves its the fault of the people for not having exercised their rights to stop the rot earlier on. We deserve our leaders in a democratic system, by very definition of the individual vote principle.

This makes life VERY EASY FOR THE OLIGARCHS. As we all run around like individual blind mice.

I think you misunderstand me, as I have said before, I'm not an anarchist.

I also have an open revulsion of pure democracy as did my forefathers.

You have no doubt heard the quip/joke that democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding whats for dinner...well thats true. The outnumbered will "die" without the protection of fair law, so constitutional republics are a better form of self governance by consent. In a democracy law is made on the whims of the majority. A constitutional republic constrains that majority so it doesn't abuse the minority.

Originally (here) thats the way it was...now its not, its closer to a democracy and all the baggage that entails with an ill informed and/or self interested public.

All those damn Somalis and their slavish devoting to Rothbard, Cato Institute, frigg'n. C-Span junkies, naming Mogadishu's main drag Koch Avenue! They just frugged the whole place up! Mussolini sets up a nice socialist central planning economy and the Somalians toss it in the dust bin of history for a flat tax and open carry.